24 comments:

Sorry, but I'm still not excited about it in the least. I may rent it from Netflix eventually if I run out of things to watch, but really I couldn't care less if I never see it. And I'm definitely not going to spend money to see it in a theater and encourage the studio to continue butchering the source material. Hopefully you enjoy it, but part of me also hopes that it flops and in 20 years somebody will try it again the right way.

It, on the other hand, should be fantastic and I'm really looking forward to Gerald's Game as well.

Dan here, and I agree the Poster is amazing. A perfect image for the Bright... uhm, no... DARK Tower. ;-)(There is a poster version which takes care of this, not sure if official or not, though:http://i.imgur.com/vnJWan3.jpg)On first sight at least. Maybe I shouldn't have looked further.

This pic also brought the term "the upside down" to mind, which of course comes from somehwere else. But then I actually turned it upside down, and liked this " corrected" version not so much:

- Flagg doesn't look much like Flagg there. Does he have short hair there? I avoided set pics, so this surprises me. And are these even Jeans? Sorry for saying that, but King is so specific about the things that Flagg wears that it matters more to me than the skin color of Roland, to be honest. In general he looks too much like your average villain there, imo. - And so do his henchmen. Are these supposed to be Low Men? Because if so, I would be very disappointed...

But let's focus on the first impression, which still remains amazing. :-)

I'm fine with that version of Flagg -- who likely won't be called Flagg -- even though he doesn't look much like the MIB of the books. I suspect he's sort of incognito, so that he blends into "our" world. He looks cool to me. I'm a McConaughey fan, though, so that was always likely to be my reaction.

I didn't notice the image of the Tower hiding in the poster at all. I liked the poster before that; once that was pointed out to me, I fucking LOVE it.

Well of course Flagg doesn't run around in his Mage robe outfits in "our" New York, but in such worlds even in the books he rather wears blue jeans, black leather jacket and boots. Which blends into our world alright. And which I was expecting.

My issue is that while I would love a faithful adaptation of The Gunslinger, seeing a film version of 2-7 doesn't particularly excite me, and I think any studio would be absoutely nuts to commit to that narrative. So in theory, I'm fine with all of the changes so far, or at least the ones I know of. I like the idea of Flagg rounding up indivduals (including Jake) who "shine" in an attempt to topple the Tower, it's an element of the series I'm glad they're focusing on, as it's a concept that was never really developed to its full potential in the books, imo.

I realize DT fans will cry foul at this not-in-any-way accurate adaptation, but I've always felt that series was always simply too weird, and the later books too anticlimactic, for this (or any) film to be anything but a new tale set in this universe King created. It was never in the cards for use to see The Crimson King throwing bombs off his balcony, and I'm okay with that.

I can see where you're coming from. I once wrote of "The Gunslinger" that while I like/love everything that comes after, part of me wishes that novel had been all there was to the series. That bill wouldn't clear the Senate even in my own brain ... but PART of me wishes it.

I don't think books 2-3 are problematic at all. You could craft a few awesome movies from those, and the same goes for book 4. Maybe even book 5. After that, it gets problematic, because as much as I love certain aspects of the final two books, I really don't know how you'd turn them into commercially viable films. No time to go into why that is; I suspect you already know.

So yeah, I definitely see where you're coming from. But I think there's enough strong material there that a talented group of filmmakers could put it to good use. Rope in "Insomnia" and some of the other Tower-adjacent tales, and even better.

Did you read the bit on Ain't It Cool News about the preview footage? It sounds bleak...Midworld has a bunch of future-y sci fi technology? A world that's supposed to have moved on? I'm still in for the sake of curiosity, but - gaaaaaah.

The poster seems to be at once going for that Inception money that Dr. Strange was after, and making audiences think of the "upside down" or whatever they called it on Stranger Things. Speaking of which, what's the word on It? Is it one or two movies?

I long ago ceased visiting AICN when I realized it had been literally years since I enjoyed anything I read there.

I have read a few reports of the footage that screened at Cinema Con, though. It sounded pretty cool to me. I don't hold out much hope that this movie will represent that novels; and having let go of that hope, I replaced it with a hope simply for a good movie. As of now, I am neutral on whether to expect that or not. There's evidence going both ways. If it's good, I won't mind the changes (mostly); if it's bad, you will read my complaints about them for the duration of this blog's existence!

I can see the comparison to Inception and Dr. Strange. However, since Dr. Strange in actuality bore no resemblance to Inception beyond the surface level, I wasn't the least bit bothered by Marvel having used Inception as a touchstone. Why wouldn't they? There were some big, weird concepts in Dr. Strange, and it probably helped quite a bit to give the audience a way into understanding them by referencing a thing they already knew.

The same trick might work for The Dark Tower, too. That's what marketing is designed to do: sell an idea first, and, if you're lucky, a product second.

My understanding is that there will be a second It if the first one is successful -- and given how much buzz the trailer generated this past week, there seems to be a LOT of potential for success. So my money is on there being a sequel.

Count me as one who thinks this looks pretty promising. I know I'm somewhat unqualified to weigh in too much, not having gotten around to the series yet, but based on the marketing, you'd have to concede that it appears they're trying.

You mentioned the trailer generating a lot of buzz, but I'm wondering if that's a typo? I can't find a trailer anywhere. Now, It, on the other hand, looks as good as any fan can possibly hope for. And I have read that. What did you think? Kind of surprised you haven't said anything.

Ah, yes, I should have clarified: there WAS a trailer, but it was only shown at Cinema Con (an industry trade show). Lots of article came out about it, though, and opinions were mixed. People unfamiliar with the books seemed to think it looked promising, whereas fans of the books were kind of indignant and WTF about it.

"The Mist" looks okay. It looks cheaper than I would have expected, not so much in terms of the effects but in terms of the lighting, sets, cast, etc. It doesn't look BAD, it just looks a bit like a show from a decade ago.

While the trailer looks like your average hollywood blockbuster crap, there is something which gives me hope. Something in the final Volume of the books, which the last time I read it was barely of relevance. And now it is so much! When Jake is having his first smoke with Roland (which might be romanticized a bit too much, especially considering Jake is underaged), there is a statement which gave me goosebumps.Because Roland said tht Jake thanks to his abilities would have been an excellent breaker...What if this very scene inspired the movie changes?

It very well might have. One of the problems with the novels is a lack of development of certain ideas. Among those: Jake's "shine." So it would make sense for an adaptation to attempt to gather those loose threads and string them throughout the narrative in a more meaningful fashion (or cut them away entirely).